News
Experts’ dismissal of Tesla’s Full Self Driving push proves Elon Musk is still not taken seriously
Despite delays, Elon Musk remains optimistic that Tesla’s efforts to achieve Full Self Driving will bear fruit soon. This was highlighted in a statement during his appearance at the recently held 2020 World Artificial Intelligence Conference in China, where he noted that Tesla is closing in on “Level 5” functionalities. Experts in the field of automation beg to differ.
In a recent statement to Automotive News, Sam Abuelsamid, principal analyst at Guidehouse Insights (formerly Navigant Research) and Missy Cummings, director of the Humans and Autonomy Laboratory at Duke University, openly dismissed Tesla’s efforts to achieve full self driving. In a scathing rebuke, Abuelsamid described Musk’s targets as absurd. He also expressed his pessimism about Tesla’s approach to automation, which focuses on vision and artificial intelligence.
“The cars they are building will never be Level 5, period. It’s nonsense. He needs to shut up until he can deliver something. The premise of making highly automated systems on cameras alone is fundamentally flawed. Their approach to software doing end-to-end AI systems is almost certainly not going to work. I don’t believe it can work. AI is too brittle,” he said.
It should be noted that Abuelsamid recently published a study ranking companies that are currently pursuing autonomy. Similar to studies conducted by Guidehouse Insights when it was still operating as Navigant Research, Abuelsamid ranked Tesla dead last, even behind startups like Navya, which have limited real world driving data.
Abuelsamid’s sentiments were echoed by Missy Cummings, who also argued that there is no way that Tesla could achieve Level 5 autonomy with its vehicles. In a statement to KCBS Radio, Cummings noted that Elon Musk likely does not understand what Level 5 Automation really is. This is an interesting comment from the director of the Humans and Autonomy Laboratory at Duke University, considering that Waymo CEO John Krafcik noted last year that ultimately, “Level 5 is a bit of a myth.”
“There is no way, shape, or form the car is going to be Level 5. He doesn’t really understand what Level 5 is. I think what he means is Level 4, and he’s not even going to get Level 4. The perception systems don’t work well in weather conditions, with long shadows. We know the Tesla perception system, and the news is it’s a really bad system,” she remarked.
While there is some merit in criticizing the Tesla CEO for missing his targets with regards to the release of the electric car maker’s full self driving system, it seems far too careless to simply dismiss all the work that Tesla has accomplished over the years either. The company, after all, is gathering real world driving data at an unprecedented scale that’s unrivaled by companies like Waymo, and that matters much when it comes to training neural networks, as emphasized by ARK Invest CEO Cathie Wood. Tesla’s vision based approach to autonomy has also gained support from notable names such as George Hotz, who believes that Tesla would eventually become the Apple of self driving cars.
It is unfortunate, but based on the dismissive and almost aggressive rebuke of Tesla’s efforts from the experts tapped by Automotive News, it appears there is still a general tendency to completely dismiss Elon Musk and his initiatives. Interestingly enough, these statements are pretty familiar to those who have followed the SpaceX and Tesla story over the years. It may be difficult to recall at this point, but there was a time when it was believed that landing the Falcon 9 first stage on land and an autonomous barge on the sea is impossible. There was also a time when the Model X was considered unbuildable.
Fortunately, Tesla and its CEO are a stubborn bunch, and it takes a lot more than skepticism to discourage the company. This is especially notable considering that Tesla is currently looking to roll out a massive rewrite of its Autopilot suite, which should take the company even closer to full self driving. Perhaps this time around, Elon Musk’s statements about Level 5 Autonomy may actually be pretty accurate, at least in terms of its features and timeframe.
“I’m extremely confident that level five or essentially complete autonomy will happen, and I think, will happen very quickly,” said Musk, answering another question. I think at Tesla, I feel like we are very close to level five autonomy. I think—I remain confident that we will have the basic functionality for level five autonomy complete this year,” Musk said at the 2020 WAIC.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
